When talking about leagues and their uniform outfitters, MLB is the great outlier. While the other pro leagues and major college programs have gone with lifestyle brands like nike free, Adidas and Under Armour, MLB has stubbornly stuck with Majestic, a company that doesn't make sneakers or other footwear, doesn't have flashy marketing campaigns, doesn't sign athletes to big endorsement contracts, and really doesn't do much of anything except make baseball uniforms.

If Nike lost the NFL uniform contract, would it make a play for the MLB deal? I recently posed that question to a few industry insiders, and they say the answer is probably no. There are lots of reasons, but these are the two primary ones:

? Although some fans associate nike free run 5.0 primarily with eye-popping graphics, the company's brand image is really rooted in performance-enhancing technology and innovation. Baseball uniforms just don't play very well to those strengths, because the sport doesn't feature sustained contact or athleticism.

? nike air max billigt already has the MLB undershirt contract and gets great exposure from having its logo appear at most players' necklines. The Majestic logo, by comparison, is on the left jersey sleeve -- a much less prominent spot. Nike is getting so much bang for its branding buck out of this arrangement that retailers often get inquiries from fans who say they're looking to buy their favorite team's "new nike air max 90 jersey," even though Nike doesn't make MLB jerseys. So why invest in a big jersey contract when some fans already think you have one?

Of course, the situation is more complex than that, and there are lots of additional factors that could make an MLB deal either more or less appealing to nike air max 1. Still, the feedback from these insiders makes good food for thought.